Re: [Module::Build] codebase? paths in .tar.gz?

[Glenn L. <pe...@ne...>]

On approximately 12/19/2003 12:44 AM, came the following characters from
the keyboard of Randy W. Sims:

> 
> These warnings are due to Archive::Tar and are fixed for future release
> 
>> = 1.08. These are just warnings and won't cause problems.

I don't believe that until I can see the directory structure in the 
.tar.gz file... because right now it seems there are warnings, and the 
result is broken.

>> D:\GFfP>perl build ppd
>> Cannot create a PPD file unless codebase argument is given
> 
> 
> I misspoke on the win32 list: It's the ppd target (not dist) where you
> specify the codebase param:
> 
> perl Build ppd codebase="."

I guess the missing codebase wasn't the only problem.

D:\GFfP>perl build ppd codebase=.
Use of uninitialized value in substitution (s///) at 
C:\Perl\site\lib/Module/Build/PPMMaker.pm line 126.
Use of uninitialized value in sprintf at 
C:\Perl\site\lib/Module/Build/PPMMaker.pm line 31.

But looking at the .ppd, it does seem that a better default for codebase 
would be the simple name of the .tar.gz file.... so

D:\GFfP>perl build ppd codebase="GFfP-0.1.tar.gz"
Use of uninitialized value in substitution (s///) at 
C:\Perl\site\lib/Module/Build/PPMMaker.pm line 126.
Use of uninitialized value in sprintf at 
C:\Perl\site\lib/Module/Build/PPMMaker.pm line 31.

D:\GFfP>type GFfP.ppd
<SOFTPKG NAME="GFfP" VERSION="0,1,0,0">
     <TITLE>GFfP</TITLE>
     <ABSTRACT></ABSTRACT>
     <AUTHOR>Glenn Linderman &lt;pe...@ne...&gt;</AUTHOR>
     <IMPLEMENTATION>
         <PERLCORE VERSION="5,008000,0,0" />
         <OS VALUE="MSWin32" />
         <ARCHITECTURE NAME="MSWin32-x86-multi-thread" />
         <CODEBASE HREF="GFfP-0.1.tar.gz" />
     </IMPLEMENTATION>
</SOFTPKG>

This produces a pretty nice looking result, real corresponding to other 
.ppd files for other modules with similar requirements.  But apparently 
there are a couple bugs in the build ppd that produce the warnings above.

And so I'd like to see a "fix" to allow CODEBASE to default to the name 
of the .tar.gz file built by "build dist", and then people that want 
something more complex can still provide the command line override, or 
the build.pl file setting, or whatever.  But the above type of PPD can 
be copied from spot to spot, together with keeping the .tar.gz in the 
same directory, and works great.

>> And all those warnings from perl build dist are for directories... and 
>> indeed, the resulting .tar.gz file has a flat structure... the files 
>> are  all there, but their directory structure is not preserved.  As a 
>> result,  I can't distribute the package.
> 
> 
> Some programs don't see the directory structure in the tar created by
> Archive::Tar. If you use the ptar script distributed with A::T, you
> should see that the directory structure is valid.

So you mean A::T is incompatible with the standard TAR files that lots 
of programs know about?  Hmmm.  ptar didn't get installed with A::T.

Well, if the directory structure is there, I have 2 tar other programs 
that A::T is incompatible with.

Hmmm.  Can't find "ptar" in the A::T distribution, either.  But I do 
notice that the A::T distribution has a directory structure that my 
programs that can't see the directory structure of M::B dist output can 
see.  Of course, maybe A::T doesn't use itself to pack itself, I 
wouldn't know without reading its build code... too late for that 
yesterday.  I've got to get to bed.

> Andrew, do you know if this has changed for future versions of A::T?
> 
>> It'd be nice to have a sample MANIFEST file too, for a sample
>> project.
>>
>> Seems to me like the Cookbook should have a trivial, but complete, 
>> example of all the stuff you need to make your own pure perl module, 
>> and another example with all the stuff you need to make your own XS 
>> module.  I know that those sorts of examples would have saved me a lot 
>> of time today.
>>
> 
> I see you got past the YAML errors; did they go away after installing YAML?

Yeah, they went away like magic, once YAML was installed.  Just more 
dependency-itis to deal with.

Thanks again for the responses.

-- 
Glenn -- http://nevcal.com/
===========================
Like almost everyone, I receive a lot of spam every day, much of it
offering to help me get out of debt or get rich quick.  It's ridiculous.
-- Bill Gates

And here is why it is ridiculous:
  The division that includes Windows posted an operating profit of $2.26 
  billion on revenue of $2.81 billion.
  --from Reuters via 
http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/031113/tech_microsoft_msn_1.html

So that's profit of over 400% of investment... with a bit more 
investment in Windows technology, particularly in the area of 
reliability, the profit percentage might go down, but so might the bugs 
and security problems?  Seems like it would be a reasonable tradeoff. 
WalMart earnings are 3.4% of investment.